Court holds that past conviction and incarceration cannot indefinitely delay passport issuance after Supreme Court's release order; police counter affidavit accepted as verification report
In a significant judgment dated October 28, 2026, the Madras High Court, presided over by Justice P.T. Asha, directed the Regional Passport Office, Chennai, to dispose of the passport application of petitioner A.G. Perarivalan within four weeks. The Court emphasized that a mere past conviction and prior incarceration cannot justify indefinite withholding of a passport application, especially when the petitioner has been set at liberty by the Supreme Court and no criminal case is presently pending against him.
A.G. Perarivalan, who was previously convicted under various stringent laws including the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), and initially sentenced to death, had his sentence commuted to life imprisonment by the Supreme Court in 2014. Subsequently, in 2022, the Supreme Court ordered his immediate release considering the period already served. Following his release, Perarivalan applied for a fresh passport on May 6, 2024, through the Passport Seva Online portal.
Despite fulfilling all procedural requirements, including attending his appointment at the Passport Seva Kendra in October 2024 and cooperating fully with police verification procedures, his application remained "On Hold" for nearly two years pending police verification. The police station concerned, Jolarpettai Police Station, Tirupathur District, filed a status report confirming that no criminal case was pending against Perarivalan post-release and that the police continued to monitor his activities.
The Court took cognizance of the police counter affidavit and held that such a document containing relevant particulars can be treated as an adequate police verification report. The Court referred to the Full Bench decision in Jawahar Rajan v. Regional Passport Officer (2026), which clarified that the pendency of a criminal case is not an absolute bar to the issuance of a passport.
Justice Asha ruled that the Passport Authority's reluctance to process the application awaiting a police verification report was improper in the given facts. The Court thus issued a writ of mandamus directing the Passport Authority to consider the police counter affidavit as the verification report and dispose of the passport application within four weeks from the date of the order.
This judgment reaffirms the principle that once a person has been released by the highest court and no criminal proceedings are ongoing, administrative authorities must not unduly delay fundamental rights such as the issuance of a passport. The Court's directive also underlines the importance of timely disposal of passport applications, balancing state security concerns with individual liberty and the right to travel.
Bottom Line:
Passport - Mere past conviction and prior incarceration, after petitioner has been set at liberty by Supreme Court and no criminal case is presently pending, cannot justify indefinite withholding of passport application on the ground of awaited police verification - Counter affidavit of police can be treated as police verification report - Passport authority directed to dispose of application within four weeks.
Statutory provision(s):
Passports Act, 1967; Arms Act, 1959; Explosive Substances Act, 1908; Foreigners Act, 1946; Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933; Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA)
A.G.Perarivalan v. Regional Passport Office-Chennai, (Madras) : Law Finder Doc Id # 3012535
